1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to a collaborative work support system that support collaborative works performed by plural users using shared windows on computers.
2. Description of Related Art
Conventionally, a system on which participants discuss by displaying shared data on shared windows and exchanging real time messages via computer network is well-known.
The following are known as this kind of system Colab System of Palo Alto Lab. of Xerox Co. (M. Stefik, D. G. Bobrow, G. Foster, S. Lanning, and D. Tatar Xerox Palo Alto, Research Center "WYSISIS Revised: Early Experiences with Multiuser Interfaces", ACM Transaction on Office Data Systems, Vol.5, No.2, April 1987, Pages 147-167); TeamWorkstation of Nippon Telephone & Telecom (Ishii Hiroshi, "TeamWorkstation: Towards a Seamless Shared Workspace", CSCW 90 Proceedings, October 1990, pp.13-26 and Japanese Patent Laid-Open Hei.3-119476); and MERMAID (Japanese Patent Laid-Open Hei.3-58658).
In these system, for example, when plural participants who are remote from each other have a meeting, a group for the meeting is created by specifying addresses of workstations or the like used by the participants, and an application program necessary for the meeting is invoked. Then, the participants exchange messages each other. The computers for all the participants (operators of a collaborative work referred to "meeting") display a common screen image (shared window). As a result of operations performed in the shared window for one of the participants, all the other shared windows are changed to the same.
For example, each participant can write an opinion into the shared window through his computer. In response to an opinion written by a participant, another participant can write another opinion through his computer. Thus, even if they use plural computers, they can discuss each other as if they share the opinions on a blackboard.
These systems record the final result of data that is displayed on the shared window and written into the shared window. Later, the recorded data can be played back and are seen as a meeting record.
For example, there is a case that participants have a meeting using a blackboard. While some of them have a lively discussion, others who does not take part in the discussion think another proposal or an opinion from another view point and write it onto papers. Then the others submit the new proposal in pauses of the lively discussion.
However, in many cases, the submitted data written on papers is not stored or distributed. In particular, when participants remote from each other have a meeting by using a television conference system, it is rare to distribute materials that are not prepared beforehand.
It would be possible to store these proposal by using the function for storing a result provided by the shared window of the system described above. However, in the system using shared windows, when a participant who does not participate in a lively discussion writes into a shared window by using his own computer, the written data appears on the shared windows of the other computers and disturb the discussion.
In view of this problem, Japanese Patent Laid-Open Hei.5-89217 and Japanese Patent Laid-Open Hei.6-161956 disclose collaborative work support systems in which while some participants have a lively discussion by using shared windows, the other participants can individually write their opinions without disturbing the participants who have the lively discussion.
The collaborative work support system disclosed by Hei.6-161956 manages data of opinions for each participant who submits his opinion to the shared window and picks up differences among opinions of the participants. Thus, this system can automatically provides a difference among opinions of participants or a difference between shared data and an opinion of a participant.
When meeting data has been recorded during a meeting and contents of the meeting are played back after the meeting, it is desired to edit the recorded meeting data easily. The meeting data can include the following: sounds; screen images of the shared window; and references by participants to the materials for meeting displayed on a screen.
As an art for editing minutes, for example, Japanese Patent Laid-Open Hei.7-182365 discloses a multimedia minutes creation support system that specifies a person who refers to materials for meeting in accordance with records of references by participants to the materials for meeting during the meeting and creates a search file that stores a starting time and an end time of an event occurring on computers, such as a reference operation. When creating minutes, this system can play back images and sounds of the scene desired by the minutes creator according to the search file.
A system that records data regarding a structure of discussion during the discussion and visualizes the process of the discussion according to the recorded data is also known. (e.g. Jeff Conklin, Michael L. Begeman. "gIBIS: A Hypertext Tool for Exploratory Policy Discussion", CSCW88 Proceedings, September, 1988, pp.140-152)
When the record of a meeting is played back, it is important to make the process of the discussion understandable.
However, the above-described shared window system only stores the final result of the data written into the shared window. In many cases, it is difficult to understand the process of a discussion by observing the final result.
As described above, the collaborative work support system disclosed by Japanese Patent Laid-Open Hei.6-161956 manages data of opinions for each participant who submits data of opinions to the shared window. Thus, difference of opinions among the participants or difference between an opinion of each participant and shared data can be obtained automatically. However, it is difficult to know the flow of discussion, since a process of discussion in a meeting can be known only by the changes of opinions of plural participants as time lapses.
The multimedia minutes creation support system disclosed by Japanese Patent Laid-Open Hei.7-182365 records the timing of reference to the materials for meeting and the timing when participants start speaking. However, those times are recorded simply on a time axis. Thus, it does not manage data as a set of opinions of participants of a meeting in association with each other.
Thus, for example, when the former point in question recovers once after the point in question has been changed, there is no way to record the recovery of the former point in question as a flow of the discussion.
When plural participants discuss, it is difficult to conjecture change points of the discussion according to only changes of speakers and materials for meeting that the participants refer to. In many cases, while participants refer to the same material for meeting, they discuss from many viewpoints. Thus, it is difficult to conjecture the change of point in question according to only the starting time of speaking and the timing of reference to materials for meeting.
In the above-described system that visualizes the process of a discussion by recording data of the argument structure, participants of a meeting should submit an opinion after specifying the structure of the opinion in detail. For example, they should specify the subject of the opinion or whether the opinion agrees to the subject, or the like. Since the participant should consider carefully to specify the structure, it is difficult to specify the structure while discussing. In addition, the detailed argument structure is represented as a block of complicated lines on a screen. Thus, this system can show the logical structure. However, it is difficult for the system to show the flow of discussion after the meeting.
Conventionally, it is provided a system that stores a history of operations on the computer performed by the user and repeats the operations in the order of time so as to reproduce the user's operations (Fractal Design Art School). It may be possible to apply this system to the system that stores a history of operations performed by the user in a meeting and plays back the operations. However, even if a history of operations performed by the user is stored and all the operations are reproduced in the order of time, it is difficult to know the change point of discussion unless observing and fully confirming the contents.
In other words, a person who plays back and sees the contents of a meeting is required to reconstruct a set of opinions in association with each other and change point of points in question. That is, a history of sets of opinions in association with each other and change points of points in question cannot be stored. Thus, when people understand the contents of meeting in different way or long time passes after the meeting, even the participants of the meeting sometimes cannot reconstruct it.